Rolling Doughnut

How I voted:

Congress

Senate: Jim Webb. I struggled over this because, despite Sen. Allen being a vile politician who deserves no public office, Mr. Webb’s economic views are wrong. But Sen. Allen is so contemptible and devoid of character that it’s impossible for me to avoid casting a vote against him.

House of Representatives: Andrew Hurst. I’m not eager about the Democrats, for every reason Michael Kinsley mentions today. Clearly Mr. Hurst’s stance on every issue is lifted from this document. Blech. But Tom Davis, of steroid investigations and Congressman Loose Cannon fame, represents me. Not if I can help it. I will vote against him whenever he is on the ballot, even if I have to hold my nose while I vote.

Local Politics

I don’t care, so I punted this and voted for myself.

Ballot Questions

Question 1: No on the bigot amendment. Obviously. I will not respect my state any longer if this passes.

Question 2: No. This one requires an explanation.

Shall Section 14 of Article IV of the Constitution of Virginia be amended by deleting the provision that prohibits the incorporation of churches, a provision that was ruled to be unconstitutional and therefore now is obsolete?

This particular question doesn’t bother me. It was ruled unconstitutional, I don’t care. However, it’ll be useful for future generations to see what we’ve done to the Constitution through history. This point doesn’t matter, but when the federal courts finally recognize that Question 1 is unconstitutional, I will vote to leave it in the Constitution, even though it will be obsolete. If Question 1 passes today, our Constitution will be sullied forever. History should forever mark the blunt tools of hatred. Thus, in principle for how I will vote in the future, I voted no.

Question 3: No on property tax exemptions for conservation, redevelopment, and rehabilitation.

Bond Issues

No across the board. See fiscal responsibility.

That’s how I voted. I waited almost 90 minutes to vote for the defeat of Sen. Allen and Question 1. Soon enough, I’ll find out if my fellow Virginians are reasonable.

This is the “thought” process of the man who championed Virginia’s bigot amendment:

The debate was over, and the stately atrium at the University of Virginia School of Law was nearly empty. But Del. Robert G. Marshall, a Prince William County Republican who wryly refers to himself as Virginia’s “chief homophobe,” was just warming up to his next showdown over same-sex marriage.

“There is a natural order of things, a natural order where gay marriage is an impossibility,” he said, books tucked under his arm and waving a hand for emphasis, like the disheveled college professor he often resembles. “For example, a woman’s arm is constructed at a certain angle so that she can adequately cradle a baby. This is the way we’re created. There are just certain things that nature intended.”

At what point did intelligence and logic become offensive liabilities to public service?

This is the position of a self-proclaimed conservative:

All the European countries supporting homosexual marriage will be Muslim by 2100 (unless there is a great Christian revival). In either case, homosexual marriage will be a short-lived social experiment by Liberal/Socialist Human Secularists.

Support for same-sex marriage equals a willingness to capitulate to theocracy. That’s an interesting thesis, unsupported by any other evidence. Of course, I could suggest a thesis that support for same-sex marriage bans equals a willingness to capitulate to theocracy. Question 1 would be my supporting evidence.

For more straw man pummeling, read this comment by the same person. The original blog entry, though, is admirable.

Adding on to what I said earlier about Iraq, it might help to repost this entry from a few years ago:

A Pacifist’s War Principles

1. I hate war.
2. War is rarely justified.
3. When justified, it must be undertaken.
4. When undertaken, it is a necessary evil.
5. Because it’s a necessary evil, only victory will suffice.
6. Victory is measured by permanently stopping the instigators.
7. Stopping the instigators must be viewed through the eyes of justice.
8. The eyes of justice do not seek vengeance.
9. Vengeance creates mistakes.
10. Mistakes transform victory into failure.
11. Failure is unacceptable.

It’s a bit cutesy, I admit, but I think it sums up what I believe about war. It should be a last resort, but once undertaken, it must be won. The current administration failed and continues to fail at so many items on this list – 2, 5, 6, maybe 7, 10, 11 – that it must be held accountable. It must be forced to adopt a strategy other than stay the course because we’re losing.

To share the blame, I clearly failed at my second criteria. Again, that was mostly my ignorance of politics and history. I hope I’ll be less likely to make that mistake in the future. I know I’ll doubt more often, which is key to better government.

As for strategy for winning in Iraq, I don’t have one. Neither does the Bush administration. It must develop one, if victory in Iraq is still possible. I’m skeptical that it is still winnable, despite believing for a long time that we couldn’t abandon Iraq, no matter how public sentiment viewed the war. We created it, we must fix it. But now I fear we must leave. That isn’t a “give me a timetable” requirement, just a sense that we must finally begin diplomacy.

Whatever path we take coming out of today’s election, Iraq and its people will suffer. That is our fault, and we will carry the shame. President Bush must bear responsibility for that, even if it’s only the judgment of history. As citizens we must resist the inevitable push for war that will arise in the future to eliminate the defeat of Iraq from our psyche. We must not create new mistakes to pretend past mistakes never happened. Vigilance is our duty.

In voting for Democrats, I do not endorse Democratic ideas as stated in the election. They’re idiots, but they’re just not as bad as the Republicans we now have in office. For example, a big Democratic talking point this year is PAYGO, as in pay as you go. I have a problem with this mentality, even though our federal budget is out of control.

The fundamental assumption of PAYGO, as I perceive it, is we can only spend what we can pay for. The problem is obvious. If we set tax rates high enough, we can afford a lot. But that’s flawed, because it will lead us to destruction. If the end is destruction, I don’t care if we pay for it or our grandchildren pay for it. Suicide is bad government policy.

Instead, our assumption should be based on what qualifies as legitimate government spending. Is it Constitutional and necessary? Then we should have it. As such, we should have federal revenue to pay for it now. That’s the point at which Congress should set tax policy. Budget, then fund.

If Democrats win Congress today, President Bush needs to remember where he chucked his veto pen.

In looking at today’s election, competence is the overwhelming issue. The Republicans clearly lack it for putting a lust for power over their duty to the Constitution. The Democrats clearly lack it for failing to fight the Republican lust for power with better solutions to what’s facing us. It’s enough to make me disillusioned. Yet, I remain optimistic that our form of government will prevail. Probably not today, and almost definitely not in Virginia, but in the long-term, it will prevail. That leaves hope. I’d rather have certainty through evidence, but hope will have to be enough.

Among the issues that build into the question of competence, Iraq and paternalistic majoritarianism remain the key indicators. I’ve written enough about the latter, but I haven’t written much about Iraq because I haven’t had much to say that isn’t elsewhere. But I should clarify my position. In the buildup to the war, I was deferential to the administration’s claims of WMD proof. I was foolish to trust so blindly. I was politically and historically ignorant, failing to heed the examples shown through history where this president’s grandiose vision was misguided and unlikely to succeed. As a voter, knowing better was my responsibility, and I failed.

Once the war started, though, the only logical choice was victory. We created the mess, so we had to finish it. President Bush and the Congress failed miserably at that important task. With its lack of accountability and avoidance of the truth, Republicans in power abandoned their duty. Three years in, with victory nowhere close, it’s apparent that President Bush is incapable or unwilling to win. Republicans in Congress have been complicit. This must change.

I do not believe Democrats will be better. But I know the path we’re on will not bring us victory and a safer world. The choice is between known and unknown. Maybe the unknown will be worse, but following the known will lead to defeat. How much more dangerous will that make the world? I do not want to find out. It’s time for the president’s current enablers to go.

I don’t expect majority status to change Democrats into a party of ideas. I believe they’ll cut and run. Where we’re at, that’s probably best. I’ll expect the best, with a return to leadership. I will not be surprised if it doesn’t. But the choice now is between finding confirmation in ideology and finding truth in facts. Republicans won’t accept reality. Democrats might. Today, that’s all I have.

Earlier in this election season, I expressed reservations that Democrats would take control from the Republicans. The extensive reach for control over individual lives, as well as an obscene disregard for the Constitution, should be enough, but voters don’t appear swayed by that. I’m not surprised. Even when pulling the (R) or (D) lever isn’t a requirement in a voter’s mind, the pull of the incumbent is strong.

Yesterday morning, Howard Stern discussed how he plans to vote today. He initially suggested that he intends to vote a straight Democratic ticket because of Iraq and other Republican disasters. After only a moment, he caught himself and suggested that he might vote for a Republican. He reasoned that he shouldn’t punish his Republican representative if he’s done a good job. Unfortunately, he gave no objective criteria for defining “good job”. I suspect he couldn’t. And I suspect most voters couldn’t name any for their representatives, either. Yet, they possess an attachment to their incumbent.

The problem with that is obvious. If enough voters hold onto a subjective sense that Congress is corrupt but their representative is good, the entrenchment continues. Essentially, voters are stupid. Consider this essay from Cato Unbound (source):

The prevailing view even among the well-educated is that it is unseemly to question the competence of the average voter. Many elites go further by praising the insight of the average voter, no matter how silly his views seem.

As long as elites persist in unmerited deference to and flattery of the majority, containing the dangers of voter irrationality will be very hard. Someone has to tell the emperor when he is naked. He may not listen, but if no one speaks up, he will almost surely continue embarrassing himself and traumatizing spectators.

Again, voters are stupid. But I don’t say that in a judgmental manner aimed at the lesser informed, inferior voters who don’t think like I do. I’m a stupid voter. I’ve made mistakes in casting my vote before and I know I will again. But I will strive to make better, if not fewer, mistakes.

For example, last year I voted for Democrat Tim Kaine for governor of Virginia. As I blogged at the time, I ultimately based my decision on last year’s ramblings about same-sex marriage¹. Republican Jerry Kilgore was for an amendment. Gov. Kaine should’ve been against it. I knew he opposed same-sex marriage, but opposition and an amendment aren’t the same, regardless of how wrong each stance is. I expected him to respect Virginia’s Constitution. When he had the chance to do so after the General Assembly passed the amendment, he didn’t. He accepted a populist appeal to letting the majority decide which rights people may have, rather than acknowledging that our Constitution protects rights, not grants them. Gov. Kaine is a politician where I’d hoped for a statesman. I’m stupid for expecting better.

Going into today’s election, I’m still not sold on a mass change in voter opinion. I still think voters are more interested in emotional reasons for voting than evidence-based reasons². With gerrymandered districts to protect them, I expect Republicans to survive. I hope to be proven wrong, but I’m not basing any level of happiness on it.

¹ Contrary to this laughable essay about Sen. Rick Santorum’s alleged appeal to libertarians, basing my decision on same-sex marriage does not change me from a libertarian voter to a “single-issue gay-rights voter.” A politician’s stance on the same-sex marriage issue has as much to do with principles of government as his stance on any other issue. But I accept that if a politician can’t get this fundamental issue correct, and is willing to amend a Constitution with bigotry to get his way, that’s enough. So I am a single-issue voter. My issue is the sanctity of Constitutional protections of liberty.

² I’m pretty sure this entry ruins any chance I may have had at a political career.

Former Representative Dick Armey responds to Dr. James Dobson’s charges I wrote about earlier this week.

When you boil it down, this debate centers on the role of two critical ideas: freedom and righteousness. In our private lives, living righteously is paramount. However, in our public lives — in our relationship with policymakers and our government — we should resist the belief that the power of government should be used to force righteous behavior in others. That’s the temptation facing religious conservatives.

Indeed, such efforts to impose righteousness are doomed to fail — society cannot truly become righteous simply because the government compels “righteous” behavior. God gave us free will, and true righteousness can only be found through a free exercise of personal choice. Although Dobson may not realize it, government-mandated righteousness is a pathway to tyranny.

That’s spot-on, the perfect take-down of the idiocy put forth by Dobson.

However, and this is key given how Mr. Armey has tried to reposition himself as a conservative with a libertarian streak, I’m not sold on Mr. Armey’s transformation. Two paragraphs from his rebuttal are cringe-worthy in the context of Mr. Armey’s plea for freedom and limited government.

The very real tragedy of the past 60 years is the ongoing expansion and intrusion of the federal government into the traditionally private sphere of American life. Activist judges are clearly responsible for much of the damage, but just as corrosive is the expansion of the federal bureaucracy into education, welfare, and health care and retirement. The result is that private, social decisions once left to individuals and communities are now under the control of Washington powerbrokers. Our cultural debate has become politicized.
…

Indeed, pandering and posturing on gay marriage is an insult to most voters. I’m the first person to argue that marriage is between a man and a woman. But here, Jim Dobson himself is prone to hyperbole, having claimed in one campaign speech that homosexuals and gay marriage “will destroy the earth.” We should leave such rhetoric to Al Gore, where it is better suited.

For someone painting himself as a statesman instead of a former politician, Mr. Armey hits talking points far too well. “Activist judges” are not clearly responsible for anything, other than correcting legislative failures. And if one is truly freedom-oriented, with limited government above imposed righteousness, it’s irrelevant that Mr. Armey believes marriage should be between a man and a woman. Religious marriage? No problem. Civil marriage, where religion should not be imposed as Mr. Armey argues? Not so much.

Skewer conservatives for every meddling, big government policy now prancing around as conservative policy. But there can be no exceptions. If he’s going to pull punches on a few sacred cows he happens to believe based on his religion and not his principles, Mr. Armey should get out of the way and let someone else do the necessary job. I nominate George Will.